I read the Brighton Society's comments (The Argus, July 26) about the proposed development at the King Alfred centre in Hove and they were full of unintended irony: "We already have the Royal Pavilion as our architectural gem."
Yet the Pavilion was an outrage in its day and would never have been built had it had to go through the modern planning process.
We all tend to be innately conservative and very cautious about the unfamiliar. But we cannot live in a cocoon.
Preserving the past successfully must be done alongside bold and imaginative building for the future.
I opposed the proposal for the 18-storey thin tower on King's Esplanade because I thought it was a poor design of an inappropriate height for the immediate area.
However, the nearby King Alfred site is larger and well suited for a real landmark development which could help regenerate our city. I very much support Frank Gehry's design.
I live close to the site and understand other people's fears, especially those immediately adjacent to the site. The council and the developer must address these concerns.
The developers and the council have to deal with the major concern - the juxtaposition of a large, modern development with the surrounding, traditional and much lower buildings.
We must all show imagination and mutual respect in moving forward.
-John Kernaghan, Hove
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article